Obama's Renewing American Leadership and the PNAC papers

[BlackVelvet04]

Renewing American Leadership

Today, we are again called to provide visionary leadership. This century's threats are at least as dangerous as and in some ways more complex than those we have confronted in the past. They come from weapons that can kill on a mass scale and from global terrorists who respond to alienation or perceived injustice with murderous nihilism.

To recognize the number and complexity of these threats is not to give way to pessimism. Rather, it is a call to action. These threats demand a new vision of leadership in the twenty-first century -- a vision that draws from the past but is not bound by outdated thinking.




We can neither retreat from the world nor try to bully it into submission. We must lead the world, by deed and by example.



The mission of the United States is to provide global leadership grounded in the understanding that the world shares a common security and a common humanity.



The American moment is not over, but it must be seized anew. To see American power in terminal decline is to ignore America's great promise and historic purpose in the world. If elected president, I will start renewing that promise and purpose the day I take office.
http://www.pierretristam.com/Bobst/07/wf070607a.htm





The Project for the New American Century
September 2000

“As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the
world’s most preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in
the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does
the United States have the vision to build upon the achievement of
past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a
new century favorable to American principles and interests?
“ a military that is strong and ready to meet
both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and
purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national
leadership that accepts the United States’ global responsibilities.
“Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its
power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global
leadership of the costs that are associated with its exercise. America
has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia,
and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite
challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th
century should have taught us that it is important to shape
circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they
become dire. The history of the past century should have taught us
to embrace the cause of American leadership.”
– From the Project’s founding Statement of Principles
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

[AX10]

1. kick

[BlackVelvet04]

5. Thanks AX10......

do we hear crickets?

[FrenchieCat]

34. What don't you elaborate......because I don't see the connection, at all.......

PNAC wrote a letter to Bill Clinton about attacking Iraq. They believe in using hard power to achieve and maintain world dominance.

Why don't you articulate the exact association...and make sure to back your shit up.

Thank you!

And BTW, this is what Obama was saying about the Big Iraq war.......when PNAC was pushing it

Delivered on 26 October 2002 at an anti-war rally

I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech

[stillcool]

2. here's something different.......

Contrasting Teams

Senator Clinton’s foreign policy advisors tend to be veterans of President Bill Clinton’s administration, most notably former secretary of state Madeleine Albright and former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger. Her most influential advisor - and her likely choice for Secretary of State - is Richard Holbrooke. Holbrooke served in a number of key roles in her husband’s administration, including U.S. ambassador to the UN and member of the cabinet, special emissary to the Balkans, assistant secretary of state for European and Canadian affairs, and U.S. ambassador to Germany. He also served as President Jimmy Carter’s assistant secretary of state for East Asia in propping up Marcos in the Philippines, supporting Suharto’s repression in East Timor, and backing the generals behind the Kwangju massacre in South Korea.

Senator Barack Obama’s foreign policy advisers, who on average tend to be younger than those of the former first lady, include mainstream strategic analysts who have worked with previous Democratic administrations, such as former national security advisors Zbigniew Brzezinski and Anthony Lake, former assistant secretary of state Susan Rice, and former navy secretary Richard Danzig. They have also included some of the more enlightened and creative members of the Democratic Party establishment, such as Joseph Cirincione and Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress, and former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke. His team also includes the noted human rights scholar and international law advocate Samantha Power - author of a recent New Yorker article on U.S. manipulation of the UN in post-invasion Iraq - and other liberal academics. Some of his advisors, however, have particularly poor records on human rights and international law, such as retired General Merrill McPeak, a backer of Indonesia’s occupation of East Timor, and Dennis Ross, a supporter of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank.
Contrasting Issues

While some of Obama’s key advisors, like Larry Korb, have expressed concern at the enormous waste from excess military spending, Clinton’s advisors have been strong supporters of increased resources for the military.

While Obama advisors Susan Rice and Samantha Power have stressed the importance of U.S. multilateral engagement, Albright allies herself with the jingoism of the Bush administration, taking the attitude that “If we have to use force, it is because we are America! We are the indispensable nation. We stand tall, and we see further into the future.”
--------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps the most important difference between the two foreign policy teams concerns Iraq. Given the similarities in the proposed Iraq policies of Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama, Obama’s supporters have emphasized that their candidate had the better judgment in opposing the invasion beforehand. Indeed, in the critical months prior to the launch of the war in 2003, Obama openly challenged the Bush administration’s exaggerated claims of an Iraqi threat and presciently warned that a war would lead to an increase in Islamic extremism, terrorism, and regional instability, as well as a decline in America’s standing in the world.

Stephen Zunes, a Foreign Policy In Focus analyst, is a professor of politics and international studies at the University of San Francisco
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4940

[BlackVelvet04]

4. sorry....

you need to make your point...it's too late to read all of that and you aren't supposed to post a whole article.

[Hardrada]

8. I read it but I"m a quick scan.

[stillcool]

16. You're right...

I didn't actually post the whole article...but it was way too much. I don't actually see your point. I assume you are trying to link PNAC policy with Obama's speeches. Just thought I'd supply a little information on the inaccuracy.

[NMMNG]

3. Well, he's praised for wanting to collaborate with the Republicans, right?

:shrug:

[sandnsea]

6. He called out the Perle/Wolfowitz ideology crammed down our throats

He's the only one who did. You guys are getting truly pathetic. This is a low I don't think even Hillary would try. You ought to delete it and save yourself lasting embarrassment. I'm old, I'll forget you did this.

[BlackVelvet04]

7. Maybe you should pull your head out of your ass and go read the two....

that might be a good place to start.

[sandnsea]

12. Obama is not a PNACer

does not support the PNAC agenda and I'm not even going to entertain it with you. It's the most assinine thing that's ever ever been posted at DU -- EVER. I don't even know how far your head would have to be up your ass for that kind of shit to get into your brain in the first place.

[BlackVelvet04]

15. You haven't read the two, have you?

I have which is why I realized his paper sounding like their paper.

You might want to stomp your feet to add some emphasis. Maybe throw yourself in the floor and scream, too.

[sandnsea]

17. Ever heard of WMD and Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaties? n/t

[BlackVelvet04]

18. No.....

I've been living in a cave until a week ago and just saw television for the first time today. :eyes:

[sandnsea]

21. By the way you threw together unrelated documents

it's not my fault for thinking that you were still in the cave. You cherry-picked two unrelated documents and then threw them together to make an insane point, especially since Obama actually called out Perle/Wolfowitz back in 2002. How about if I go get Mein Kampf and find something in it to compare to Hillary? How stupid would that be. Oh, gee, I just crawled out of a cave and had no idea they were complete philosophical opposites.

:crazy:

[BlackVelvet04]

25. I read Obama's paper and it sounds like the PNAC

papers to me. If they don't to you, fine. I don't think you've read the PNAC papers.

[sandnsea]

26. And Hillary's sounds like Mein Kampf

:shrug:

And another on ignore.

[BlackVelvet04]

27. Oh now that really hurts my feelings......

:rofl:

Maybe you could pull out portions and compare them to things she's said. Probably not, though.

[rodeodance]

37. IGNORE IS FOR PEOPLE WHO CLOSE THEIR MINDS TO OTHER PERSPECTIVES.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

28. well, 2 more Key Hillary Internet Staffers quit today

so maybe they need something to do?

""As part of the expansion of our Internet department following a tremendously successful month online, we will be adding 4 new staffers, two of whom will replace Kevin Thurman and Crystal Patterson, who moved on to new positions. Kevin and Crystal have been valued members of our team and we are grateful to them for their contribution to the campaign."
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/hillary_bloodletting_continues.php

[rodeodance]

38. BUT "we will be adding 4 new staffers, "

[Truth2Tell]

9. Yes, but what Obama has going for him

is that most Americans love this "world leader" shit. PNAC went off the tracks because they chose a lunatic to run it (Cheney) and a chimp boy to act as front man. If Iraq had only gone down like a redo of Gulf War I, most Americans would still be happy as clams at the seat of Empire. All of our Democratic leadership understood this when they held hands and passed the IWR - and they all still understand it now. We are a people enamored of what we believe to be our rightful place at the top of the food chain. Until that paradigm changes, nobody's gonna win any Presidential elections up in here without this kinda PNACy BS.

[BlackVelvet04]

14. He also wants to enlarge the army

and marines and build up the military.

Throughout the Middle East, we must harness American power to reinvigorate American diplomacy. Tough-minded diplomacy, backed by the whole range of instruments of American power -- political, economic, and military -- could bring success even when dealing with long-standing adversaries such as Iran and Syria. Our policy of issuing threats and relying on intermediaries to curb Iran's nuclear program, sponsorship of terrorism, and regional aggression is failing. Although we must not rule out using military force, we should not hesitate to talk directly to Iran.


We should expand our ground forces by adding 65,000 soldiers to the army and 27,000 marines.



I will not hesitate to use force, unilaterally if necessary, to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked or imminently threatened.

[Truth2Tell]

24. I know it. Don't gotta tell me.

However, your girl is in exactly the same boat. Peas in a pod, as it were. She's all about the Empire, and the military buildup, and the "American power" blather as well.

But like I said, nobody's gonna win the American Presidency these days without the Militarist and Nationalist hokum.

It's somewhat amusing to watch all the pots calling kettles black and vice versa on DU these days. Oh, the irony.

[kelligesq]

10. After the last 7 years of what the world has seen of American leadership,

it's doubtful that the world would ever be interested in allowing American global leadership again...not only doubtful, but as we have seen the only country
sticking to b's perverse plans is the UK - the rest of the so-called coaliton caught on and left long ago.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

13. you speak the truth

[Straight Shooter]

11. "Today, we are again called to provide visionary leadership."

Oh, sweet Jeezus on a pogo stick, we've always been the ones who are supposed to set an example. I'm really tired of his patronizing bubble-gum rhetoric.

[Indenturedebtor]

19. Bubble gum rhetoric

Backed by solid policy wins votes. Rhetoric makes things happen... or have you never taken a history class before? Oh you have? Well then why write this post :shrug:

Calling Obama a PNACer? For shame. Who got the most money from oil companies? Oh that's right. HRC. OK :P

[rodeodance]

39. Its that vision that has so many SWOONING!

[MagickMuffin]

20. It appears both our candidates want a strong military

Will Marshall one of the co-founders of DLC signed onto a PNAC letter declaring "We need to back Bush and his Iraq policies."

I don't have time to read the whole article, I have it saved to read later.

[Occam Bandage]

22. ...

[ArkySue]

23. Oh, I thought the OP was going to be about

Scooter Libby's close friend Dennis Ross:

Dennis Ross, (advisor to Barack Obama) was a friend of Scooter's for 25 yrs and was also served with a select coterie on the Advisory Committee of the Scooter Libby Legal Defense Fund, raising the multiple millions needed to assure Scooter would not be convicted.

Ross...is a Distinguished Fellow at WINEP with Wolfowitz, Pipes and Perle.
edit:typos

[rodeodance]

40. thanks, i did not know.

[AntiFascist]

29. I do believe those threats are real...

and anyone who has been keeping up with developments on DU should understand that as well.

The difference is, by the time Obama becomes president we may come to understand that it is the neocons themselves who are largely responsible for those threats. Funny how their own words can be used against them.

[Indenturedebtor]

30. I believe those threats are real as well

I mean hell you would have to ignore the fact that they've been playing that policy book to the letter.

But how does withdrawing immediately from Iraq play into that? HRC was the last one to pledge immediate phased withdrawal. Only about a month ago I believe.

Furthermore again who has taken the most money from big oil?

Aren't both of these elements central to the PNAC schtick?

Telling a country that you absolutely will not attack it when it is threatening to attack your allies is kinda silly no? But at least he didn't say he would attack them (Iran).

PNAC pfah. I'm not even sure I would say that about our DLC candidate. For shame.

[FrenchieCat]

31. I am very familiar with PNAC (for the last 8 years).......and don't understand

how you are associating that Cabal to Barack Obama.

Help me out here? :shrug:

Just a smear, hey?

How weak!

[RummyTheDummy]

32. Scoreboard!

Buy yeah, he's a PNACer :sarcasm:

[Why Syzygy]

33. where THE HELL is that information?

Certainly not the OP.

[FrenchieCat]

35. NO where........Op is "hoping" we don't read.........

and that we are amazingly stupid. :shrug:


It would be laughable, if PNAC was something funny, but it ain't.

Samanta Powers is a foreign policy advisor for Obama.

She wrote a pulitzer Award winning book, a Problem from Hell, which chronicles various genocides such as Rwanda and the Sudan. Maybe she knows that Obama won't ignore genocide in Africa, like Clinton did.



Samantha Power is the Anna Lindh Professor of Practice of Global Leadership and Public Policy, based at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, where she was the founding executive director <1998-2002>. She is the recent author of Chasing the Flame: Sergio Vieira de Mello and the Fight to Save the World (Penguin Press, 2008), a biography of the UN envoy killed by a suicide bomber in Iraq in 2003. Her book "A Problem from Hell": America and the Age of Genocide (New Republic Books) was awarded the 2003 Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction, the 2003 National Book Critics Circle Award for general nonfiction, and the Council on Foreign Relations' Arthur Ross Prize for the best book in U.S. foreign policy. Power's New Yorker article on the horrors in Darfur, Sudan, won the 2005 National Magazine Award for best reporting. In 2007, Power became a foreign policy columnist at Time magazine. From 1993 to 1996 she covered the wars in the former Yugoslavia as a reporter for the U.S. News and World Report, the Boston Globe, and The New Republic. She remains a working journalist, reporting from such places as Burundi, East Timor, Kosovo, Rwanda, Sudan, and Zimbabwe, and contributing to the Atlantic Monthly, The New Yorker and The New York Review of Books. Power is the editor, with Graham Allison, of Realizing Human Rights: Moving from Inspiration to Impact. A graduate of Yale University and Harvard Law School, she moved to the United States from Ireland at the age of nine. She spent 2005 to 2006 working in the office of Senator Barack Obama.

[Ichingcarpenter]

41. I love how the Clintons use projection

and think that we don't understand its usage.

Thanks for the info, that was another big one for me
that turned me from Clinton in his last years

[rodeodance]

43. is that like that VISIONARY thingy of Obama's ??

[Ichingcarpenter]

44. I think you need to look at Hillary's visionary campaign

your candidate managerial vision speaks for itself.

Hillary loss me on her vision on a free internet which is not even visible.

[rodeodance]

45. NOPE--she is pragmatic, --gets things done.

[Ichingcarpenter]

46. This thread is a lie

you know it or do we need to bring Bill's connections to
the Bush Crime Family again and all those threads, links and connections?
I don't want to go there and I hope you don't either.
You've read each one as have I so I don't think we need
to rehash that.



Obama is no Dennis, Gore or Edwards, I know Obama is tied
to the power structure more than these candidates

But to me he's my better choice right now.
Your candidate, still has honor to me, where Bill does not.

Anyway, no matter which of our choices win, we will still win this fall,
after these sad 8 years.

I know moderate Republicans that will vote against the Republican nominee
or not vote.


PEACE OUT

[Why Syzygy]

36. Hillary's DLC is pro-PNAC . you've got it backwards.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4548862&mesg_id=4548862

[rodeodance]

42. I have always said, much of their policy is similar. Now we have this. thanks

[RuleOfNah]

47. Could someone please spell out if it has been spelled out?

I'm too tired to read the back stories. I get the PNAC thing. I get that candidates may or may not have substantial or insubstantial ties to PNAC droppings. I get that it would be great to campaint with a PNAC brush. I'm hoping for something simple. Has any candidate for President been publicly and aggressively clear about PNAC recently? I'm not talking detailed agenda items. I'm not talking rough overviews and timelines. I'm talking PNAC BLEEPING SUCKS AND I'M GOING TO BLEEPING FIX IT ASAP. More speech writertific and expensive medianized, of course, mentioning Malta would be asking way too much.

If not, any McVain or Huckamoon campaint would be nice, if it isn't a bother.

[Why Syzygy]

49. None of them wrote it. Those are all neocons.

Here's a handy little lesson re: the neocons and who they are. Basically, the Bush cabal. No democrats.

http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/index.html

[anigbrowl]

48. This is sooo much bullshit.

I've been studying International relations for >10 years - meaning I subscribe to journals like Foreign Affairs (so I read Obama's essay there 6 months ago) and I knew who the people in PNAC were and what they stood for long before Bush even became president. Comparing Obama's approach to foreign policy with theirs is ridiculous. Forget apples and oranges - more like apples and hand grenades.

[ellacott]

50. There have also been ties between the DLC and PNAC

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4498250